She Stoops to Conquer
I understand; you took them in a round,
while they supposed themselves going forward.
And so you have at at last
brought them home again.
--She Stoops to Conquer,
Oliver Goldsmith
Yeah runnin' down a dream
That never would come to me
Workin' on a mystery
That never would come to me
--Runnin' Down a Dream,
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
You will never see a team play harder
than we will the rest of the season.
God bless.
--Tim Tebow promise
____________________
[the latter two quotations are in honor of Gainesville. Sa-lut.]
We were hoping he would be there, and so he was.
We noticed Jim last week outside of a Gainesville Starbucks, proudly displaying his "Bernie 2016" sign at the corner bistro table. When we arrived back in town today, he was precisely as we'd left him, though we thought with an ineffable air of wistfulness (or perhaps it was a slight melancholy) following the latest shenanigans of the Democratic (i.e., Clinton) machine.
When asked how he felt about his candidate's situation, he did not voice any rancor. He said he was proud of Mr. Sanders (to whose campaign he said he had donated money), and that Bernie had "opened the debate".
He had a certain equanimity, a peace that surpasseth all understanding. Perhaps it was resignation, but Jim's civility stood in stark contrast to the boorish behavior to which we are party on the tube.
Much as Mr. Trump has functioned in the Republican's posse, Mr. Sanders was a burr, albeit a mild- mannered one, who also functioned to animate those members of his party who held out hope against hope for something new.
The behaviors at both party's conventions is vexatious. Certainly campaigns have historically often been rowdy slugfests, but the party faithful always coalesced behind their candidates at convention time. Not so this year.
Bernie's supporters heckled Elizabeth Warren as the farcical handover of power to Mrs. Clinton occurred in a scripted, crypto-Soviet fashion. "You betrayed us!" the crowd chanted, unaware that the betrayal had already occurred echelons above Ms. Warren.
Mr. Sanders could've been a contender, but the power elite did not like him. He was the primary threat to Hillary; in fact, the only one. Now as more pesky emails emanating from within the Party itself deriding Mr. Sanders threaten to block Mrs. Clinton's hoped-for ascent to throne, Democratic Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has fallen on her sword for Mrs. Clinton. Buh, bye, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
It becomes curiouser and curiouser. It seems the only reason to vote for Hillary and maintain personal dignity would be for the Presidential power of Supreme Court nomination. However, as Mr. Trump is largely a centrist Republican, it could be inferred that given the opportunity he would nominate a centrist jurist. Perhaps someone in the vein of Nixon's nominee, Justice John Paul Stevens, who served the Court well and honorably.
We were hoping he would be there, and so he was.
We noticed Jim last week outside of a Gainesville Starbucks, proudly displaying his "Bernie 2016" sign at the corner bistro table. When we arrived back in town today, he was precisely as we'd left him, though we thought with an ineffable air of wistfulness (or perhaps it was a slight melancholy) following the latest shenanigans of the Democratic (i.e., Clinton) machine.
When asked how he felt about his candidate's situation, he did not voice any rancor. He said he was proud of Mr. Sanders (to whose campaign he said he had donated money), and that Bernie had "opened the debate".
He had a certain equanimity, a peace that surpasseth all understanding. Perhaps it was resignation, but Jim's civility stood in stark contrast to the boorish behavior to which we are party on the tube.
Much as Mr. Trump has functioned in the Republican's posse, Mr. Sanders was a burr, albeit a mild- mannered one, who also functioned to animate those members of his party who held out hope against hope for something new.
The behaviors at both party's conventions is vexatious. Certainly campaigns have historically often been rowdy slugfests, but the party faithful always coalesced behind their candidates at convention time. Not so this year.
Bernie's supporters heckled Elizabeth Warren as the farcical handover of power to Mrs. Clinton occurred in a scripted, crypto-Soviet fashion. "You betrayed us!" the crowd chanted, unaware that the betrayal had already occurred echelons above Ms. Warren.
Mr. Sanders could've been a contender, but the power elite did not like him. He was the primary threat to Hillary; in fact, the only one. Now as more pesky emails emanating from within the Party itself deriding Mr. Sanders threaten to block Mrs. Clinton's hoped-for ascent to throne, Democratic Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has fallen on her sword for Mrs. Clinton. Buh, bye, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
It becomes curiouser and curiouser. It seems the only reason to vote for Hillary and maintain personal dignity would be for the Presidential power of Supreme Court nomination. However, as Mr. Trump is largely a centrist Republican, it could be inferred that given the opportunity he would nominate a centrist jurist. Perhaps someone in the vein of Nixon's nominee, Justice John Paul Stevens, who served the Court well and honorably.
Her husband Bill could weather such debris fairly unscathed due to his rakish charisma, of which Mrs. Clinton shares not a whit.
Labels: Bernie Sanders, Democratic National Convention, DNC, Elizabeth Warren, hillary clinton, more Clinton emails
posted by Lisa at 4:52 PM
4 Comments:
Interesting thoughts. It seems to me that you're witnessing at the Democratic convention exactly what many of the so-called "establishment" types in the GOP dreamed of having at theirs: a humble, chastened outsider obediently stepping into line behind the chosen responsible/mature/whatever candidate. As in 1984, perhaps the metaphorical knives will come out for Sanders, but it will be later, once the performance is done and he's done his bit for the party and his usefulness as a redeemed rebel has come to an end.
"Soviet" does indeed seem like a good word for all this.
With respect David, who is "more mature" than Bernie?
His call for unity at the DNC ("Sisters and brothers, sisters and brothers") reminded me nothing so much as Mouammer Gaddafy's cry, "My children, my children!" as his people shoved hard objects up his anal cavity, before killing him.
Ouch Lisa! Seems it is a British tradition also. Richard III, and Edward II, and Edmund Ironside.
And good on you Jim for sticking up for Bernie. I like Bernie myself, I hope he has a role in the future. My first choice was Jim Webb but he dropped out long before my Washington State caucus. I was not happy with some of Bernie's caucus supporters here. They sweet talked and buttered me up to switch sides. This went on for an hour or more and then they started repeating the same tired Limbaugh/OReilly accusations against Hill. But when I stayed firm and refused to cross over they got nasty and called me a pimp for a corporate whore. That was among the nicer things they said.
I believe Bernie never had a chance. Hill's 12 percent (55% of primary voters, 17 million) against Bernie's 43%, 13 million would be considered a blowout if it had happened in the general election. All the weeping and gnashing of teeth about superdelegates comes to nothing if you consider that she had close to 400 pledged delegates more than Bernie. And most of his state wins were due to caucuses, where typically only devoted activists show up. Hillary's state wins were in primary elections where many more people show up.
Lisa - perhaps "mature" was a poor choice of words on my part, but I think your analogy is an appropriate one.
My only point was, and it probably wasn't a very profound one, that the Democratic Party evidently accomplished the humbling of Sanders in a way that the so-called establishment of the GOP once dreamed of doing to Trump.
Post a Comment
<< Home